[Federal Register: June 23, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 120)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 37361-37368]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr23jn03-26]
[[Page 37361]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part V
Department of the Interior
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fish and Wildlife Service
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
50 CFR Part 20
Supplemental Proposals for Migratory Game Bird Hunting Regulations for
the 2003-04 Hunting Season With Request for 2004 Spring/Summer
Migratory Bird Subsistence Harvest Proposals in Alaska; Notice of
Meetings; Proposed Rule
[[Page 37362]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 20
RIN 1018-AI93
Migratory Bird Hunting; Supplemental Proposals for Migratory Game
Bird Hunting Regulations for the 2003-04 Hunting Season With Request
for 2004 Spring/Summer Migratory Bird Subsistence Harvest Proposals in
Alaska; Notice of Meetings
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; supplemental.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (hereinafter Service or we)
proposed in an earlier document to establish annual hunting regulations
for certain migratory game birds for the 2003-04 hunting season. This
supplement to the proposed rule provides the regulatory schedule;
announces the Service Migratory Bird Regulations Committee and Flyway
Council meetings; provides Flyway Council recommendations resulting
from their March meetings; requests proposals for the 2004 spring/
summer migratory bird subsistence season in Alaska; and finalizes
regulatory alternatives for the 2003-04 duck hunting seasons.
DATES: The Service Migratory Bird Regulations Committee will meet to
consider and develop proposed regulations for early-season migratory
bird hunting on June 18 and 19, 2003, and for late-season migratory
bird hunting and the 2004 spring/summer migratory bird subsistence
seasons in Alaska on July 30 and 31, 2003. All meetings will commence
at approximately 8:30 a.m. You must submit comments on the proposed
migratory bird hunting-season frameworks for Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto
Rico, the Virgin Islands, and other early seasons by July 30, 2003, and
for proposed late-season frameworks and subsistence hunting seasons in
Alaska by August 30, 2003.
ADDRESSES: The Service Migratory Bird Regulations Committee will meet
in room 200 of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Arlington Square
Building, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Arlington, Virginia. Send your
comments on the proposals to the Chief, Division of Migratory Bird
Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior,
ms MBSP-4107-ARLSQ, 1849 C Street, NW., Washington, DC 20240. All
comments received, including names and addresses, will become part of
the public record. You may inspect comments during normal business
hours at the Service's office in room 4107, Arlington Square Building,
4501 N. Fairfax Drive, Arlington, Virginia.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian Millsap, Chief, or Ron W. Kokel,
Division of Migratory Bird Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
(703) 358-1714.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulations Schedule for 2003
On May 6, 2003, we published in the Federal Register (68 FR 24324)
a proposal to amend 50 CFR part 20. The proposal provided a background
and overview of the migratory bird hunting regulations process, and
dealt with the establishment of seasons, limits, and other regulations
for hunting migratory game birds under Sec. Sec. 20.101 through
20.107, 20.109, and 20.110 of subpart K. This document is the second in
a series of proposed, supplemental, and final rules for migratory game
bird hunting regulations. We will publish proposed early-season
frameworks in early July, late-season frameworks in early August, and
subsistence seasons in Alaska in September. We will publish final
regulatory frameworks for early seasons on or about August 20, 2003,
for late seasons on or about September 15, 2003, and for subsistence
seasons in Alaska in November 2003.
Service Migratory Bird Regulations Committee Meetings
The Service Migratory Bird Regulations Committee will meet June 18-
19, 2003, to review information on the current status of migratory
shore and upland game birds and develop 2003-04 migratory game bird
regulations recommendations for these species plus regulations for
migratory game birds in Alaska, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands.
The Committee will also develop regulations recommendations for special
September waterfowl seasons in designated States, special sea duck
seasons in the Atlantic Flyway, and extended falconry seasons. In
addition, the Committee will review and discuss preliminary information
on the status of waterfowl.
At the July 30-31, 2003, meetings, the Committee will review
information on the current status of waterfowl and develop 2003-04
migratory game bird regulations recommendations for regular waterfowl
seasons and other species and seasons not previously discussed at the
early-season meetings. In addition, the Committee will develop
recommendations for the 2004 spring/summer migratory bird subsistence
season in Alaska.
In accordance with Departmental policy, these meetings are open to
public observation. You may submit written comments to the Service on
the matters discussed.
Announcement of Flyway Council Meetings
Service representatives will be present at the individual meetings
of the four Flyway Councils this July. Although agendas are not yet
available, these meetings usually commence at 8 a.m. on the days
indicated.
Atlantic Flyway Council: July 21-25, Allenberry Resort Inn, Boiling
Springs, Pennsylvania.
Mississippi Flyway Council: July 23-26, Holiday Inn in Traverse
City, Michigan.
Central Flyway Council: July 21-25, Quality Inn, Taos, New Mexico.
Pacific Flyway Council: July 21-23 and July 25, Vail Cascade
Resort, Vail, Colorado.
Request for 2004 Spring/Summer Migratory Bird Subsistence Harvest
Proposals in Alaska
Background
The 1916 Convention for the Protection of Migratory Birds between
the United States and Great Britain (for Canada) established a closed
season for the taking of migratory birds between March 10 and September
1. Residents of northern Alaska and Canada traditionally harvested
migratory birds for nutritional purposes during the spring and summer
months. The governments of Canada, Mexico, and the United States
recently amended the 1916 Convention and the subsequent 1936 Mexico
Convention for the Protection of Migratory Birds and Game Mammals. The
amended treaties provide for the legal subsistence harvest of migratory
birds and their eggs in Alaska and Canada during the closed season.
On August 16, 2002, we published in the Federal Register (67 FR
53511) a final rule that established procedures for incorporating
subsistence management into the continental migratory bird management
program. These regulations, developed under a new co-management process
involving the Service, the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, and
Alaska Native representatives, established an annual procedure to
develop harvest guidelines for implementation of a spring/summer
migratory bird subsistence harvest. Eligibility and inclusion
requirements necessary to participate in the spring/
[[Page 37363]]
summer migratory bird subsistence season in Alaska are outlined in 50
CFR part 92.
This supplemental rule calls for proposals for regulations that
will expire on August 31, 2004, for the spring/summer subsistence
harvest of migratory birds in Alaska. Each year, seasons will open
after March 11 and close prior to September 1.
Alaska Spring/Summer Subsistence Harvest Proposal Procedures
We will publish details of the Alaska spring/summer subsistence
harvest proposals in later Federal Register documents under 50 CFR Part
92. General relationship to the process for developing national hunting
regulations for migratory game birds is as follows:
(a) Alaska Migratory Bird Co-Management Council. (1) Proposals may
be submitted by the public to the Co-management Council during the
period of November 1-December 15, 2003, to be acted upon for the 2005
migratory bird subsistence harvest season. Proposals should be
submitted to the Executive Director of the Co-management Council,
listed above under the caption ADDRESSES.
(b) Flyway councils. (1) Proposed 2004 regulations recommended by
the Co-management Council will be submitted to all Flyway Councils for
review and comment. The Council's recommendations must be submitted
prior to the SRC's last regular meeting of the calendar year in order
to be approved for spring/summer harvest beginning March 11 of the
following calendar year.
(2) Alaska Native representatives may be appointed by the Co-
management Council to attend meetings of one or more of the four Flyway
Councils to discuss recommended regulations or other proposed
management actions.
(c) Service regulations committee. Proposed annual regulations
recommended by the Co-management Council will be submitted to the
Service Regulations Committee for their review and recommendation to
the Service Director. Following the Service Director's review and
recommendation, the proposals will be forwarded to the Department of
Interior for approval. Proposed annual regulations will then be
published in the Federal Register for public review and comment,
similar to the annual migratory game bird hunting regulations. Final
spring/summer regulations for Alaska will be published in the Federal
Register in the preceding Fall.
Because of the time required for our and public review, proposals
from the Co-management Council for the 2004 spring/summer migratory
bird subsistence harvest season should be submitted to the Flyway
Councils and the Service by June 15, 2003, for their comments and
Service action on July 30-31, 2003.
Review of Public Comments
This supplemental rulemaking describes Flyway Council recommended
changes based on the preliminary proposals published in the May 6,
2003, Federal Register. We have included only those recommendations
requiring either new proposals or substantial modification of the
preliminary proposals. This supplement does not include recommendations
that simply support or oppose preliminary proposals and provide no
recommended alternatives. We will consider these recommendations later
in the regulations-development process. We will publish responses to
all proposals and written comments when we develop final frameworks. In
addition, this supplemental rulemaking contains the final regulatory
alternatives for the 2003-04 duck hunting seasons. We have included all
Flyway Council recommendations received relating to the development of
these alternatives.
We seek additional information and comments on the recommendations
in this supplemental proposed rule. New proposals and modifications to
previously described proposals are discussed below. Wherever possible,
they are discussed under headings corresponding to the numbered items
identified in the May 6, 2003, proposed rule. Only those categories
requiring your attention or for which we received Flyway Council
recommendations are discussed below.
1. Ducks
Categories used to discuss issues related to duck harvest
management are: (A) General Harvest Strategy, (B) Regulatory
Alternatives, including specification of framework dates, season
length, and bag limits, (C) Zones and Split Seasons, and (D) Special
Seasons/Species Management.
A. General Harvest Strategy
Council Recommendations: The Atlantic Flyway Council recommended
that selection of the appropriate regulatory alternative for the
Atlantic Flyway should be based on optimal harvest strategies for
eastern mallards. The Council also recommended that annual changes in
regulations should be limited to no more than one step up or down among
the regulatory alternatives (e.g., from ``liberal'' to ``moderate,''
but not ``liberal'' to ``restrictive'').
The Upper- and Lower-Region Regulations Committees of the
Mississippi Flyway Council recommended limiting regulation changes to
one step annually, and also that hunting seasons should remain open
above the range of mallard population and pond levels where hunting
seasons were open historically.
The Central Flyway Council recommended placing a constraint on the
Adaptive Harvest Management (AHM) process that ensures seasons will
remain open when mallard breeding populations (traditional breeding
areas plus the Great Lakes region) exceed 5.5 million. The Central
Flyway Council did not support limiting annual regulatory changes to
one step each year.
The Pacific Flyway Council also recommended placing a constraint on
the AHM process that ensures seasons will remain open when mallard
breeding populations (traditional breeding areas plus the Great Lakes
region) exceed 5.5 million, due to the fact that it appears to have
relatively little impact on the frequency of ``moderate'' and
``liberal'' seasons. However, the Pacific Flyway Council did not
support limiting annual regulatory changes to one step because it
appears to make the harvest strategy more conservative overall.
Written Comments: The Illinois Department of Natural Resources and
the Colorado Division of Wildlife did not support placing a limitation
on changes in regulations to one step each year. Further, the Illinois
Department of Natural Resources recommended that hunting seasons should
remain open above the range of mallard population and pond levels where
hunting seasons were open historically, and the Colorado Division of
Wildlife recommended placing a constraint on the AHM process that
ensures seasons will remain open when mallard breeding populations
(traditional breeding areas plus the Great Lakes region) exceed 5.5
million.
Service Response: As recommended by the Atlantic Flyway Council, we
will continue to select a regulatory alternative in the Atlantic Flyway
based on the status of eastern mallards. However, we reiterate that
this arrangement is still considered provisional, and it is important
to press forward with development of an adaptive harvest strategy for
the Atlantic Flyway that appropriately accounts for other key species
in the harvest, such as black ducks and wood ducks.
We understand the desires of the Atlantic and Mississippi Flyway
Councils to limit changes in annual
[[Page 37364]]
regulations to one step because it is expected to significantly reduce
temporal variability in hunting regulations, as well as lower the
prospect of closed hunting seasons. These benefits are expected to
accrue with little or no impact to the size of the mallard population
or harvest. However, the Central and Pacific Flyway Councils oppose the
``one-step'' constraint, principally because it is expected to
significantly reduce the frequency of liberal seasons. We believe that
further discussion of the ``one-step'' constraint is needed to develop
consensus regarding the trade-offs inherent in this constraint.
Consensus is necessary because it is not feasible to permit this
constraint for some Flyways and not others (since all Flyways must
share a common management objective for shared breeding stocks).
Therefore, we will not implement the ``one-step'' constraint for the
2003-04 duck-hunting season.
There has been longstanding concern within the waterfowl management
community about the prospect of closed seasons arising from the AHM
process for midcontinent mallards in instances where the biological
data and historical experience show that may not be necessary. Based on
the management objective that has been in place since 1996, closed
hunting seasons might be prescribed in about 30% of all years in the
three western Flyways as a way to more rapidly increase mallard
population size when it falls below the goal of the North American
Waterfowl Management Plan. The Flyway Councils' recommendation would
significantly reduce the frequency of closed-season prescriptions (to
about 17% of all years), apparently with little biological impact.
Based on current biological assessments, closed hunting seasons do not
appear to be necessary from the perspective of sustainable harvesting
when the midcontinent mallard population (traditional survey area plus
the Great Lakes region) exceeds 5.5 million. The impact of maintaining
open seasons above this level also appears to be negligible for other
midcontinent duck species (scaup, gadwall, wigeon, green-winged teal,
blue-winged teal, shoveler, pintail, redhead, and canvasbacks).
Therefore, we intend to accept the recommendation to maintain open
duck-hunting seasons when the midcontinent mallard population is above
5.5 million. However, we note that closed seasons targeted at
particular species or populations could still be necessary in some
situations regardless of the status of midcontinent mallards.
B. Regulatory Alternatives
Council Recommendations: The Atlantic Flyway Council, the Upper-
and Lower-Region Regulations Committees of the Mississippi Flyway
Council, the Central Flyway Council, and the Pacific Flyway Council
recommended that regulatory alternatives for duck-hunting seasons
remain the same as those used in 2002, with the exception that the
``very restrictive'' alternative be eliminated.
The Pacific Flyway Council supports framework-date extensions as
outlined in the Service's May 6, 2003, Federal Register, and notes that
selection of framework extensions is contingent on approval by State
wildlife regulatory organizations.
Written Comments: The Illinois Department of Natural Resources and
the Colorado Division of Wildlife supported elimination of the ``very
restrictive'' alternative.
Service Response: We note that expected harvest rates under the
``very restrictive'' alternative do not differ significantly from those
under the ``restrictive'' alternative. Moreover, the ``very
restrictive'' alternative would be expected to be prescribed for only
about 5% or less of all hunting seasons. Because elimination of the
``very restrictive'' alternative appears to have negligible resource
impacts, we concur with the recommendation of all four Flyway Councils
and intend to eliminate this alternative from consideration for the
2003-04 hunting season. All other aspects of the regulatory
alternatives will remain as proposed in the May 6 Federal Register.
D. Special Seasons/Species Management
i. September Teal Seasons
Council Recommendations: The Atlantic Flyway Council recommended
that States that have participated in the recent experimental teal
season (Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina,
and Georgia) be offered an operational September teal season beginning
in 2003. They recommend that the season run for nine consecutive days
during September 1-30, 2003, with a bag limit not to exceed four teal,
whenever the breeding population estimate for blue-winged teal exceeds
3.3 million in the traditional survey area. Delaware, Georgia, North
Carolina, and Virginia may have shooting hours between one-half hour
before sunrise to sunset, while shooting hours for Maryland and South
Carolina may be between sunrise and sunset.
The Upper- and Lower-Region Regulations Committees of the
Mississippi Flyway Council recommended that the 16-day September teal
seasons continue to be used when the blue-winged teal breeding
population is at or above 4.7 million, based on the recently completed
report, ``Assessment of 16-Day September Teal Seasons 1998-2000 in the
Central and Mississippi Flyways.''
The Central Flyway Council recommended that Nebraska's experimental
September teal season become operational.
ii. September Teal/Wood Duck Seasons
Council Recommendations: The Atlantic Flyway Council recommended
that the bag limit for Florida's special September wood duck and teal
season remain at 4 wood ducks and teal in the aggregate.
iv. Canvasbacks
Council Recommendations: The Atlantic Flyway Council recommends
modifying the 1994 Canvasback Harvest Strategy to allow for a limited
canvasback harvest (season within a season) during years when the
predicted harvest exceeds the allowable harvest, but can still be
achieved by a more restrictive package (moderate, restrictive, or very
restrictive). The season closure threshold would remain at a predicted
spring breeding population of 500,000.
The Central Flyway Council recommended that the existing interim
harvest strategy for canvasbacks be followed during the 2003-04 season.
v. Pintails
Council Recommendations: The Central Flyway Council recommended
that the existing interim harvest strategy for pintails be followed
during the 2003-04 season.
vii. Youth Hunt
Council Recommendations: The Atlantic Flyway Council recommended
that the Service allow all States the option of holding ``youth
waterfowl hunt days'' on nonconsecutive hunting days, while maintaining
the requirement that they must be held on non-school days.
4. Canada Geese
A. Special Seasons
Council Recommendations: The Atlantic Flyway Council recommended
that the Service increase the September Canada goose hunting season bag
limit to 8, with no possession limit beginning with the 2003-04 hunting
season. They further recommended that North Carolina's Northeast Hunt
Zone Special September Canada goose season
[[Page 37365]]
framework be extended from September 20 to September 30. They also
recommended that Rhode Island's September resident Canada goose season
framework dates of September 1 to September 30 be made operational.
The Upper- and Lower-Region Regulations Committees of the
Mississippi Flyway Council recommended that the experimental early
Canada goose season in Huron, Tuscola, and Saginaw counties in Michigan
be extended for 1 year. Further, the Committees recommended that the
Service grant operational status to Minnesota's Special September
Canada Goose Season extension (16-22 September).
The Central Flyway Council recommended that South Dakota's 3-year
experimental September Canada goose season (September 16-30) become
operational for all of eastern South Dakota (east of the Missouri
River) beginning in 2003.
The Pacific Flyway Council recommended that Wyoming's special
season framework for the Rocky Mountain population of western Canada
geese would consist of an 8-day season during September 1-15 in Bear
River, Salt River, Farson-Eden Area, Bridger Valley, and Teton
Counties, and the Little Snake River drainage portion of Carbon County.
All participants must have a valid State permit for the special season.
The number of permits may not exceed 240 in the Bear River, Salt River,
Farson-Eden Area, and Bridger Valley area, and 20 permits in the Little
Snake River drainage portion of Carbon County. The daily bag limit
would be 3, with season and possession limits of 6. Where applicable,
the season must be concurrent with the September portion of the
sandhill crane season.
B. Regular Seasons
Council Recommendations: The Upper- and Lower-Region Regulations
Committees of the Mississippi Flyway Council recommended that the
framework opening date for all species of geese for the regular goose
seasons in Michigan and Wisconsin be September 16, 2003. The Committees
also recommended that the harvest index (quota) in Minnesota's Lac qui
Parle Goose Zone be eliminated beginning in 2003.
The Central Flyway Council recommended regular season frameworks
for dark geese in the west-tier States consist of a framework opening
date of the Saturday nearest September 24 (September 27, 2003) and a
framework closing date of the Sunday nearest February 15 (February 15,
2004). The season could be divided into 2 segments, except in Wyoming,
where the season could be divided into 3 segments and evaluated in
accordance with Service criteria. Season length would be 107 days,
except in Colorado and Texas, where the season length would be 95 days.
Daily bag limit would be 5 dark geese in the aggregate, with the
following exceptions: (a) In the Western Goose Zone of Texas, the daily
bag limit would be 1 white-fronted goose and 3 other dark geese (in the
aggregate), and (b) in Colorado, the daily bag limit would be 3 dark
geese in the aggregate. The possession limit would be twice the daily
bag limit.
C. Special Late Season
Council Recommendations: The Atlantic Flyway Council recommended
that Massachusetts' late Canada goose southern boundary of the coastal
zone be extended from the present boundary in Duxbury, south to the
Cape Cod Canal.
8. Swans
Council Recommendations: The Central Flyway Council recommended
that up to 200 tundra swan permits be temporarily transferred from
South Dakota to North Dakota beginning in the 2003 season.
9. Sandhill Cranes
Council Recommendations: The Central Flyway Council recommended
accepting the 2002 Rocky Mountain population of sandhill cranes harvest
allocation of 668 birds as proposed by the Pacific Flyway.
Public Comment Invited
The Department of the Interior's policy is, whenever practicable,
to afford the public an opportunity to participate in the rulemaking
process. We intend that adopted final rules be as responsive as
possible to all concerned interests and, therefore, seek the comments
and suggestions of the public, other concerned governmental agencies,
nongovernmental organizations, and other private interests on these
proposals. Accordingly, we invite interested persons to submit written
comments, suggestions, or recommendations regarding the proposed
regulations to the address indicated under the caption ADDRESSES.
Special circumstances involved in the establishment of these
regulations limit the amount of time that we can allow for public
comment. Specifically, two considerations compress the time in which
the rulemaking process must operate: (1) The need to establish final
rules at a point early enough in the summer to allow affected State
agencies to appropriately adjust their licensing and regulatory
mechanisms; and (2) the unavailability, before mid-June, of specific,
reliable data on this year's status of some waterfowl and migratory
shore and upland game bird populations. Therefore, we believe that to
allow comment periods past the dates specified is contrary to the
public interest.
Before promulgation of final migratory game bird hunting
regulations, we will take into consideration all comments received.
Such comments, and any additional information received, may lead to
final regulations that differ from these proposals.
You may inspect comments received on the proposed annual
regulations during normal business hours at the Service's office in
room 4107, 4501 North Fairfax Drive, Arlington, Virginia. For each
series of proposed rulemakings, we will establish specific comment
periods. We will consider, but possibly may not respond in detail to,
each comment. As in the past, we will summarize all comments received
during the comment period and respond to them after the closing date.
NEPA Consideration
NEPA considerations are covered by the programmatic document,
``Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement: Issuance of Annual
Regulations Permitting the Sport Hunting of Migratory Birds (FSES 88-
14),'' filed with the Environmental Protection Agency on June 9, 1988.
We published Notice of Availability in the Federal Register on June 16,
1988 (53 FR 22582). We published our Record of Decision on August 18,
1988 (53 FR 31341). In addition, an August 1985 environmental
assessment entitled ``Guidelines for Migratory Bird Hunting Regulations
on Federal Indian Reservations and Ceded Lands'' is available from the
address indicated under the caption ADDRESSES.
In a proposed rule published in the April 30, 2001, Federal
Register (66 FR 21298), we expressed our intent to begin the process of
developing a new EIS for the migratory bird hunting program.
Endangered Species Act Consideration
Prior to issuance of the 2003-04 migratory game bird hunting
regulations, we will consider provisions of the Endangered Species Act
of 1973, as amended, (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543; hereinafter the Act) to
ensure that hunting is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence
of any species designated as endangered or threatened or modify or
destroy its critical habitat
[[Page 37366]]
and is consistent with conservation programs for those species.
Consultations under Section 7 of this Act may cause us to change
proposals in this and future supplemental proposed rulemaking
documents.
Executive Order 12866
This rule is economically significant and was reviewed by the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under Executive Order 12866. The
migratory bird hunting regulations are economically significant and are
annually reviewed by OMB under Executive Order 12866. As such, a cost/
benefit analysis was prepared in 1998 and is further discussed below
under the heading Regulatory Flexibility Act. Copies of the cost/
benefit analysis are available upon request from the address indicated
under the caption ADDRESSES.
Executive Order 12866 requires each agency to write regulations
that are easy to understand. We invite comments on how to make this
rule easier to understand, including answers to questions such as the
following:
(1) Are the requirements in the rule clearly stated?
(2) Does the rule contain technical language or jargon that
interferes with its clarity?
(3) Does the format of the rule (grouping and order of sections,
use of headings, paragraphing, etc.) aid or reduce its clarity?
(4) Would the rule be easier to understand if it were divided into
more (but shorter) sections?
(5) Is the description of the rule in the ``Supplementary
Information'' section of the preamble helpful in understanding the
rule?
(6) What else could we do to make the rule easier to understand?
Regulatory Flexibility Act
These regulations have a significant economic impact on substantial
numbers of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.). In 1998, we analyzed the economic impacts of the
annual hunting regulations on small business entities in detail, and
issued a Small Entity Flexibility Analysis (Analysis). The 1998
Analysis documented the significant beneficial economic effect on a
substantial number of small entities and estimated that migratory bird
hunters would spend between $429 million and $1.084 billion at small
businesses in 1998. The primary source of information about hunter
expenditures for migratory game bird hunting is the National Survey of
Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation, which is
conducted at 5-year intervals. The 1998 Analysis utilized the 1996
National Hunting and Fishing Survey and the U.S. Department of
Commerce's County Business Patterns. In 2002, the results from the 2001
National Hunting and Fishing Survey were released. This year, we will
update the 1998 Analysis with information from the 2001 National
Hunting and Fishing Survey. Copies of the 1998 Analysis are available
upon request from the Division of Migratory Bird Management.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
This rule is a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. For the reasons outlined above,
this rule has an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more.
However, because this rule establishes hunting seasons, we do not plan
to defer the effective date under the exemption contained in 5 U.S.C.
808(1).
Paperwork Reduction Act
We examined these regulations under the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995. The various recordkeeping and reporting requirements imposed
under regulations established in 50 CFR part 20, Subpart K, are
utilized in the formulation of migratory game bird hunting regulations.
Specifically, OMB has approved the information collection requirements
of the Migratory Bird Harvest Information Program and assigned
clearance number 1018-0015 (expires 10/31/2004). This information is
used to provide a sampling frame for voluntary national surveys to
improve our harvest estimates for all migratory game birds in order to
better manage these populations. OMB has also approved the information
collection requirements of the Sandhill Crane Harvest Questionnaire and
assigned clearance number 1018-0023 (expires 07/31/2003). The
information from this survey is used to estimate the magnitude and the
geographical and temporal distribution of the harvest, and the portion
it constitutes of the total population. A Federal agency may not
conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a
collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
We have determined and certify, in compliance with the requirements
of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, 2 U.S.C. 1502 et seq., that this
rulemaking will not impose a cost of $100 million or more in any given
year on local or State government or private entities. Therefore, this
rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act.
Civil Justice Reform--Executive Order 12988
The Department, in promulgating this proposed rule, has determined
that this rule will not unduly burden the judicial system and meets the
requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988.
Takings Implication Assessment
In accordance with Executive Order 12630, this proposed rule,
authorized by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, does not have significant
takings implications and does not affect any constitutionally protected
property rights. This rule will not result in the physical occupancy of
property, the physical invasion of property, or the regulatory taking
of any property. In fact, these rules allow hunters to exercise
otherwise unavailable privileges and, therefore, reduce restrictions on
the use of private and public property.
Energy Effects--Executive Order 13211
On May 18, 2001, the President issued Executive Order 13211 on
regulations that significantly affect energy supply, distribution, and
use. Executive Order 13211 requires agencies to prepare Statements of
Energy Effects when undertaking certain actions. While this proposed
rule is a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866, it
is not expected to adversely affect energy supplies, distribution, or
use. Therefore, this action is not a significant energy action and no
Statement of Energy Effects is required.
Federalism Effects
Due to the migratory nature of certain species of birds, the
Federal Government has been given responsibility over these species by
the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. We annually prescribe frameworks from
which the States make selections regarding the hunting of migratory
birds, and we employ guidelines to establish special regulations on
Federal Indian reservations and ceded lands. This process preserves the
ability of the States and tribes to determine which seasons meet their
individual needs. Any State or tribe may be more restrictive than the
Federal frameworks at any time. The frameworks are developed in a
cooperative process with the States and the Flyway Councils. This
process allows States to participate in the development of frameworks
from which they will make selections, thereby having an influence on
their
[[Page 37367]]
own regulations. These rules do not have a substantial direct effect on
fiscal capacity, change the roles or responsibilities of Federal or
State governments, or intrude on State policy or administration.
Therefore, in accordance with Executive Order 13132, these regulations
do not have significant federalism effects and do not have sufficient
federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism
Assessment.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 20
Exports, Hunting, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Transportation, Wildlife.
The rules that eventually will be promulgated for the 2003-04
hunting season are authorized under 16 U.S.C. 703-711, 16 U.S.C. 712,
and 16 U.S.C. 742a-j.
Dated: June 13, 2003.
David P. Smith,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
[[Page 37368]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP23JN03.010
[FR Doc. 03-15659 Filed 6-17-03; 2:54 pm]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C